The executive prerogative to not enforce laws

[T.Lex]

So, GP, this thread more interesting now?

Maybe almost... cleansed?

 

[Kutnupe14]

How did I miss this thread?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

How did I miss this thread?

You missed very little.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You missed very little.

I'm here for the gan..... uh, I mean drama.

 

[printcraft]

Hey, calling INGO members ignorant pigs is OK in my book....... too bad it's against the rules....... but.... well... you know.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Hey, calling INGO members ignorant pigs is OK in my book....... too bad it's against the rules....... but.... well... you know.

Technically comparing.

 

[printcraft]

Technically comparing.

Now you're just splitting hairs.

 

[jamil]

Now you're just splitting hairs.

Seems sometimes there's a hair's difference between a violation and not.

 

[cobber]

There's no ad hom at all. Just a statement of fact. He is dead wrong. And so are you.

No. You are. So there.

Just like a pig in slop, reveling in your ignorance. You really do bring nothing to the party.

Yeah, another non-ad hom. You're in rare form. BTW, what did you bring to the party?

 

[steveh_131]

If you loudly proclaim a demonstrably false assertion, is it not accurate to say you are 'ignorant'?

Doesn't strike me as an ad-hominem. There are several subjects I will confess my ignorance of. Some here just seem to have more subjects than others. And no desire to acknowledge them.

 

[jamil]

If you loudly proclaim a demonstrably false assertion, is it not accurate to say you are 'ignorant'?

Doesn't strike me as an ad-hominem. There are several subjects I will confess my ignorance of. Some here just seem to have more subjects than others. And no desire to acknowledge them.

Of course the same goes with pigs in slop. If it's exactly like a pig in slop it's certainly accurate to say so. That's not an ad-hominem at all.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

This is excellent and high-quality discourse.

"No, see, what this INGO member meant to say was..."

I'm going to need the history on the word usage of "slop" for the past 15 years in order to arbitrate this highly-important discussion.

 

[T.Lex]

I'm going to need the history on the word usage of "slop" for the past 15 years in order to arbitrate this highly-important discussion.

No you don't.

 

[printcraft]

If you loudly proclaim a demonstrably false assertion, is it not accurate to say you are 'ignorant'?

Doesn't strike me as an ad-hominem. There are several subjects I will confess my ignorance of. Some here just seem to have more subjects than others. And no desire to acknowledge them.

[video=youtube;37OWL7AzvHo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37OWL7AzvHo[/video]

 

[steveh_131]

Of course the same goes with pigs in slop. If it's exactly like a pig in slop it's certainly accurate to say so. That's not an ad-hominem at all.

Exactly. If you don't want your behavior to be compared with a pig in slop then don't behave as the pig does.

This is excellent and high-quality discourse.

No, we definitely need more "BREAKING: " threads to maintain that level of quality.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

No, we definitely need more "BREAKING: " threads to maintain that level of quality.

 

[steveh_131]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

 

[steveh_131]

I apologize for the low blow. Your threads are fine.

 

[ArcadiaGP]